L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO

41 ITR 12Supreme Court of India1961#2458 most cited

What is L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO authority for?

Procedural errors in administrative orders, such as misquoting a section for transfer of cases, do not vitiate the action if they do not affect the assessee's substantive rights. However, essential jurisdictional facts, like the recording of a proper satisfaction note, must be duly satisfied for valid assessment proceedings.

47

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO · 41 ITR 12 · Section 127 · Section 120 · Section 124 · Section 153A · procedural error · administrative order · substantive rights · jurisdictional fact · satisfaction note · application of mind

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 115BBCSection 12Section 120Section 124Section 127Section 12ASection 12AA

Issues it is cited on

section 158bdsection 148(2)section 132(1)section 158bsatisfaction notesection 158non-application of mindsection 149documents seizedsection 153dsection 132aunexplained expenditure

Judgments citing L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO

HEMKUNT FOUNDATIONS,GURUGRAM vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL) -1, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed and the Stay

ITA 631/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2021-22 & Stay Application No.329Del/2024 ( In Ita No. 631/Del/2024 ) Assessment Year: 2021-22 Hemkunt Foundations, Vs. Principal Commissioner Plot No.809, Second Floor, Income Tax, Rd 42, Sector 42, Central-1, Gurugram, Haryana New Delhi Pin: 122 002 Pan No. Aaath8443C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri Salil Kapoor, SumitFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Agarwal, Special Counsel and Shivansh Pandya, Jr. Standing
Section 12ASection 133ASection 143(2)Section 80G

…127 (2), while the correct applicable section is 127(3). This type of error does not vitiate/invalidate the action as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in several judgements including Isha Beevi Vs TRO (1975) 101 ITR 449 (SC) and Hazari Mal Kuthiala Vs ITO (1961) 41 ITR 12 (SC). It is well-settled that Orders u/s 120, 124 or u/s 127 are administrative in nature. They do not affect the substantive rights of the assessee. That position has been upheld by Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in several judgements including in CIT Vs S. S. Ahluwalia (2014) 46 taxmann.com 169 (Del) [Para 37] and Abhishek Jain Vs ITO (2018) 4…

VENKATESHWAR NEMURI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-4(1), IT TOWERS,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 363/HYD/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri T. Rajendra Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, DR
Section 68

…the unexplained bank deposits cannot be considered under section 68 of the Act and therefore, no addition could be made on that score. Ld. CIT(A), however referred to the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of L.Hazari Mal Kuthiala vs. ITO (1961) 41 ITR 12 (SC) and ITO vs. Saghu Buchiah Setty (1964) 52 ITR 538 (SC) and repel the contention of the assessee holding that where the power to proceed is actually there, mere reference to a wrong section for authority to act, will not vitiate the action taken and such mere mentioning of wrong section by the learned Assessing Officer would not ipso facto rend…

KK LEISURE & TOURISM INTERNATIONAL (P) LTD,KANNUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 , KOZHIKODE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed, and it’s stay applications dismissed as infructuous

ITA 510/COCH/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Paven Ved, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 153ASection 153CSection 69C

…in SA Nos. 138 to 140/Coch/2023 (AYs: 2008-09 to 2010-11) K.K. Leisure Tourism International (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT which it is to be therefore interpreted, understood and applied, for which reference be made to decisions in L. Hazari Mal Kuthiala v. ITO[1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC); Gursahai Saigal v.CIT[1963] 48 ITR 1 (SC); Calcutta Knitwears (supra), to cite some.The third requirement is that the jurisdictional fact of the material having a bearing on the determination of the total income of the other person must be satisfied for each of the years for which notice u/s. 153A is being issued, initiating thus proceedings…

KK LEISURE & TOURISM INTERNATIONAL (P) LTD,KANNUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed, and it’s stay applications dismissed as infructuous

ITA 509/COCH/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Paven Ved, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 153ASection 153CSection 69C

…in SA Nos. 138 to 140/Coch/2023 (AYs: 2008-09 to 2010-11) K.K. Leisure Tourism International (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT which it is to be therefore interpreted, understood and applied, for which reference be made to decisions in L. Hazari Mal Kuthiala v. ITO[1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC); Gursahai Saigal v.CIT[1963] 48 ITR 1 (SC); Calcutta Knitwears (supra), to cite some.The third requirement is that the jurisdictional fact of the material having a bearing on the determination of the total income of the other person must be satisfied for each of the years for which notice u/s. 153A is being issued, initiating thus proceedings…

KK LEISURE & TOURISM INTERNATIONAL (P) LTD,KANNUR vs. THE DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed, and it’s stay applications dismissed as infructuous

ITA 508/COCH/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Paven Ved, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 153ASection 153CSection 69C

…in SA Nos. 138 to 140/Coch/2023 (AYs: 2008-09 to 2010-11) K.K. Leisure Tourism International (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT which it is to be therefore interpreted, understood and applied, for which reference be made to decisions in L. Hazari Mal Kuthiala v. ITO[1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC); Gursahai Saigal v.CIT[1963] 48 ITR 1 (SC); Calcutta Knitwears (supra), to cite some.The third requirement is that the jurisdictional fact of the material having a bearing on the determination of the total income of the other person must be satisfied for each of the years for which notice u/s. 153A is being issued, initiating thus proceedings…

MUKKAM SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO WARD 2(3), KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the stay petition rendered infructuous

ITA 437/COCH/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Dec 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Johnson George, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 80ASection 80P

…the exemption/deduction provisions are to be strictly construed and, further, that the burden to prove it’s return, and the claims preferred thereby, is on the assessee. Case law on each of the propositions is legion [viz. L. Hazari Mal Kuthiala v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC)]. We may though reproduce the relevant part of latter orders: ‘5. We find no merit in assessee's foregoing arguments claiming Section 80AC(ii) of the Act as a mere directory provision in the light of Commissioner vs. Dilip Kumar & Company (2018) 9SCC 1 (SC) (FB) that provisions in a taxing statute (including deductions) have to be strictly int…

WANBURY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL PROCESSING CENTRE , BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 109/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No. 109/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Wanbury Limited बिधम / Adit, Cpc 10Th Floor, Section 30- 1St Floor, Prestige Alpha Vs. No 48/1 48/2, A Bsel Tech Park, B Beratenaagrahareabegur, Wing, Opp. Vashi Hosur Rd, Uttarahallihobli, Railway Station, Vashi Bengaluru 560100 Mumbai 400705 स्थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp5939P (अपीलाथी .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) /Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(A)Section 30Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, AM आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No. 109/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Wanbury Limited बिधम / ADIT, CPC 10th Floor, Section 30- 1st Floor, Prestige Alpha Vs. No 48/1 48/2, A BSEL Tech Park, B BeratenaagrahareaBegur, wing, Opp. Vashi Hosur Rd, UttarahalliHobli, Railway Station, Vashi Bengaluru 560100 Mumbai 400705 स्थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.PAN/GIR No. : AABCP5939P (अपीलाथी .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) /Appellant) Assessee by: Shri Madhur Agarwal Shri Krishna Kumar Revenue by: सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date…

MADHYANCHAL GRAMIN BANK ,TENDUKHEDA BRANCH., SAGAR vs. ITO(TDS)-1, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeals are dismissed

ITA 77/JAB/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur13 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

…6/2015? That would be, quite plainly, ludicrous. The charge has to be, to make it effective, thus, necessarily be read as liable to be enforced, irrespective of the filing of the statement or its processing. As explained in L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC), the exercise of power would be referable to a jurisdiction which conferred validity upon it, and not to a jurisdiction under which it would be nugatory. As explained in Gursahai Saigal v. CIT [1963] 48 ITR 1 (SC), being even otherwise trite law, the provisions of a taxing statute dealing with the machinery for assessment have to be construed…

MADHYANCHAL GRAMIN BANK ,MANDI ROAD NOWGONG BRANCH., SAGAR vs. ITO(TDS)-1, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeals are dismissed

ITA 76/JAB/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur13 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

…6/2015? That would be, quite plainly, ludicrous. The charge has to be, to make it effective, thus, necessarily be read as liable to be enforced, irrespective of the filing of the statement or its processing. As explained in L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC), the exercise of power would be referable to a jurisdiction which conferred validity upon it, and not to a jurisdiction under which it would be nugatory. As explained in Gursahai Saigal v. CIT [1963] 48 ITR 1 (SC), being even otherwise trite law, the provisions of a taxing statute dealing with the machinery for assessment have to be construed…

MADHYANCHAL GRAMIN BANK ,BUXWAHA BRANCH., SAGAR vs. ITO(TDS)-1, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeals are dismissed

ITA 75/JAB/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur13 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

…6/2015? That would be, quite plainly, ludicrous. The charge has to be, to make it effective, thus, necessarily be read as liable to be enforced, irrespective of the filing of the statement or its processing. As explained in L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC), the exercise of power would be referable to a jurisdiction which conferred validity upon it, and not to a jurisdiction under which it would be nugatory. As explained in Gursahai Saigal v. CIT [1963] 48 ITR 1 (SC), being even otherwise trite law, the provisions of a taxing statute dealing with the machinery for assessment have to be construed…

MADHYANCHAL GRAMIN BANK ,KISHANGARH BRANCH., SAGAR vs. ITO(TDS)-1, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeals are dismissed

ITA 74/JAB/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur13 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

…6/2015? That would be, quite plainly, ludicrous. The charge has to be, to make it effective, thus, necessarily be read as liable to be enforced, irrespective of the filing of the statement or its processing. As explained in L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC), the exercise of power would be referable to a jurisdiction which conferred validity upon it, and not to a jurisdiction under which it would be nugatory. As explained in Gursahai Saigal v. CIT [1963] 48 ITR 1 (SC), being even otherwise trite law, the provisions of a taxing statute dealing with the machinery for assessment have to be construed…

MADHYANCHAL GRAMIN BANK ,PIPAT BRANCH., SAGAR vs. ITO(TDS)-1, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeals are dismissed

ITA 73/JAB/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur13 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

…6/2015? That would be, quite plainly, ludicrous. The charge has to be, to make it effective, thus, necessarily be read as liable to be enforced, irrespective of the filing of the statement or its processing. As explained in L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC), the exercise of power would be referable to a jurisdiction which conferred validity upon it, and not to a jurisdiction under which it would be nugatory. As explained in Gursahai Saigal v. CIT [1963] 48 ITR 1 (SC), being even otherwise trite law, the provisions of a taxing statute dealing with the machinery for assessment have to be construed…

MADHYANCHAL GRAMIN BANK ,GOURIHAR BRANCH., SAGAR vs. ITO(TDS)-1, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeals are dismissed

ITA 72/JAB/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur13 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

…6/2015? That would be, quite plainly, ludicrous. The charge has to be, to make it effective, thus, necessarily be read as liable to be enforced, irrespective of the filing of the statement or its processing. As explained in L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC), the exercise of power would be referable to a jurisdiction which conferred validity upon it, and not to a jurisdiction under which it would be nugatory. As explained in Gursahai Saigal v. CIT [1963] 48 ITR 1 (SC), being even otherwise trite law, the provisions of a taxing statute dealing with the machinery for assessment have to be construed…

MADHYANCHAL GRAMIN BANK ,BARIGARH BRANCH., SAGAR vs. ITO(TDS)-1, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeals are dismissed

ITA 71/JAB/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur13 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

…6/2015? That would be, quite plainly, ludicrous. The charge has to be, to make it effective, thus, necessarily be read as liable to be enforced, irrespective of the filing of the statement or its processing. As explained in L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC), the exercise of power would be referable to a jurisdiction which conferred validity upon it, and not to a jurisdiction under which it would be nugatory. As explained in Gursahai Saigal v. CIT [1963] 48 ITR 1 (SC), being even otherwise trite law, the provisions of a taxing statute dealing with the machinery for assessment have to be construed…

MADHYANCHAL GRAMIN BANK ,MAHARAJPUR BRANCH., SAGAR vs. ITO(TDS)-1, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeals are dismissed

ITA 70/JAB/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur13 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

…6/2015? That would be, quite plainly, ludicrous. The charge has to be, to make it effective, thus, necessarily be read as liable to be enforced, irrespective of the filing of the statement or its processing. As explained in L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC), the exercise of power would be referable to a jurisdiction which conferred validity upon it, and not to a jurisdiction under which it would be nugatory. As explained in Gursahai Saigal v. CIT [1963] 48 ITR 1 (SC), being even otherwise trite law, the provisions of a taxing statute dealing with the machinery for assessment have to be construed…

MADHYANCHAL GRAMIN BANK ,TATTAM BRANCH., SAGAR vs. ITO(TDS)-1, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeals are dismissed

ITA 69/JAB/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur13 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

…6/2015? That would be, quite plainly, ludicrous. The charge has to be, to make it effective, thus, necessarily be read as liable to be enforced, irrespective of the filing of the statement or its processing. As explained in L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC), the exercise of power would be referable to a jurisdiction which conferred validity upon it, and not to a jurisdiction under which it would be nugatory. As explained in Gursahai Saigal v. CIT [1963] 48 ITR 1 (SC), being even otherwise trite law, the provisions of a taxing statute dealing with the machinery for assessment have to be construed…

MADHYANCHAL GRAMIN BANK ,CHHATARPUR BRANCH, SAGAR vs. ITO(TDS)-1, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeals are dismissed

ITA 68/JAB/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur13 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

…6/2015? That would be, quite plainly, ludicrous. The charge has to be, to make it effective, thus, necessarily be read as liable to be enforced, irrespective of the filing of the statement or its processing. As explained in L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC), the exercise of power would be referable to a jurisdiction which conferred validity upon it, and not to a jurisdiction under which it would be nugatory. As explained in Gursahai Saigal v. CIT [1963] 48 ITR 1 (SC), being even otherwise trite law, the provisions of a taxing statute dealing with the machinery for assessment have to be construed…

MADHYANCHAL GRAMIN BANK,LAUNDI BRANCH,SAGAR vs. ITO(TDS)-1, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeals are dismissed

ITA 67/JAB/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur13 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

…6/2015? That would be, quite plainly, ludicrous. The charge has to be, to make it effective, thus, necessarily be read as liable to be enforced, irrespective of the filing of the statement or its processing. As explained in L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC), the exercise of power would be referable to a jurisdiction which conferred validity upon it, and not to a jurisdiction under which it would be nugatory. As explained in Gursahai Saigal v. CIT [1963] 48 ITR 1 (SC), being even otherwise trite law, the provisions of a taxing statute dealing with the machinery for assessment have to be construed…

MADHYANCHAL GRAMIN BANK,SALEHA BRANCH,SAGAR vs. ITO(TDS)-2, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeals are dismissed

ITA 66/JAB/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur13 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

…6/2015? That would be, quite plainly, ludicrous. The charge has to be, to make it effective, thus, necessarily be read as liable to be enforced, irrespective of the filing of the statement or its processing. As explained in L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC), the exercise of power would be referable to a jurisdiction which conferred validity upon it, and not to a jurisdiction under which it would be nugatory. As explained in Gursahai Saigal v. CIT [1963] 48 ITR 1 (SC), being even otherwise trite law, the provisions of a taxing statute dealing with the machinery for assessment have to be construed…

MADHYANCHAL GRAMIN BANK, RANIBAUG PANNA BRANCH,SAGAR vs. ITO(TDS)-1, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeals are dismissed

ITA 65/JAB/2022[F.Y- 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur13 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

…6/2015? That would be, quite plainly, ludicrous. The charge has to be, to make it effective, thus, necessarily be read as liable to be enforced, irrespective of the filing of the statement or its processing. As explained in L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC), the exercise of power would be referable to a jurisdiction which conferred validity upon it, and not to a jurisdiction under which it would be nugatory. As explained in Gursahai Saigal v. CIT [1963] 48 ITR 1 (SC), being even otherwise trite law, the provisions of a taxing statute dealing with the machinery for assessment have to be construed…

Showing 1–20 of 47 · Page 1 of 3

L. Hazarimal Kuthalia v. ITO (41 ITR 12) — Cited in 47 Judgments | BharatTax